Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Karnataka · body

2026 DAILYLAW 24282 (KAR)

SRI THYAGARAJA R v. BANGALORE DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY

WP/16180/2026 · 2026-06-18

M Nagaprasanna, Venkatesh Naik T

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:30205-DB WP No. 16180 of 2026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 18TH DAY OF JUNE, 2026 PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA AND THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VENKATESH NAIK T WRIT PETITION NO. 16180 OF 2026 (LA-BDA) BETWEEN: SRI THYAGARAJA R, S/ O SRI. RAMANJINAPPA, AGED ABOUT 59 YEARS, R/A #7, ELU MUNDIYAMMA TEMPLE, RAMAGONDANAHALLI VILLAGE, SINGANAYAKANAHALLI POST, YELAHANKA HOBLI, BANGALORE - 560064 …PETITIONER (BY SRI GAURAV G K, ADVOCATE FOR SMT. ANUSHA NANDISH, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. BANGALORE DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY, BANGALORE DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY PRECINCTS, 5TH MAIN RD, KUMARAPARK WEST, GUTTAHALLI, BENGALURU – 560020, REPRESENTED BY THE COMMISSIONER. 2. SPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER, (DR. SHIVARAM KARANTH LAYOUT Digitally signed by SANJEEVINI J KARISHETTY Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:30205-DB WP No. 16180 of 2026 RAMAGONDANAHALLI VILLAGE) BANGALORE DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY PRECINCTS, 5TH MAIN RD, KUMARAPARK WEST, GUTTAHALLI, BENGALURU – 560020. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI SHIVAPRASAD M SHANTANAGOUDAR, ADVOCATE FOR R-1 & R2 - BDA) THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 READ WITH 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DIRECT THE RESPONDENT NOS.1 AND 2 TO CONSIDER THE REPRESENTATION DATED 26/06/2024 BY RESPONDENT NOS.1 AND 2 (ANNEXURE-A) FOR THE PURPOSE OF REGULARISATION OF HER RESIDENTIAL HOUSE INTO THE DR. SHIVARAMKARANTH LAYOUT BEARING HOUSE NO.3, NEW KATHA NO.295/3 (OLD KATHA NO.33/1), IN RAMAGONDANAHALLI VILLAGE, YELAHANKA, BENGALURU NORTH TALUK MEASURING EAST-WEST 33 FT., NORTH-SOUTH 33 FT., TOTALLY MEASURING 1089 SQ.FT. AND TO ISSUE A CERTIFICATE OF REGULARIZATION WITHIN A PERIOD OF TWO WEEKS ETC. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA and HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VENKATESH NAIK T ORAL ORDER (PER: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA) Petitioner is before this Court seeking the following prayer: - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:30205-DB WP No. 16180 of 2026 “a. Issue a Writ of Mandamus, any Order(s)/Directions directing the Respondent Nos.1 and 2 to consider the representation dated 26.06.2024 by Respondent Nos.1 and 2 (Annexure – A) for the purpose of regularization of her residential house into the Dr. Shivaramakaranth Layout bearing House No.3, New Katha No.295/3 (Old Katha No.33/1), in Ramagondanahalli Village, Yelahanka, Bengaluru North Taluk measuring East – West : 33 Ft, North – South: 33 Ft, totally measuring 1089 Sq. Ft. and to issue a Certificate of Regularization within a period of 2 weeks; b. Issue any other Writ, Order(s)/Direction(s) as may deem fit by this Hon’ble Court in the interest of justice and equity.” 2. Heard Smt. Anusha Nandish, learned counsel for petitioner and Sri Shivaprasad M. Shantanagoudar, learned standing counsel for the respondents. 3. Smt. Anusha Nandish, learned counsel for the petitioners submits that a division bench of this Court in W.P.No.8171/2025, disposed on 25.04.2025, which was identical to the case at hand, had passed the following order: “3. Smt. Anusha Nandish, learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners had constructed the residential houses in the year 2007, long before the - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:30205-DB WP No. 16180 of 2026 issuance of the preliminary notification dated 30.12.2008 and later, the petitioners have constructed the subsequent properties prior to the issuance of the final notification. The petitioners submitted representation for regularization of their houses so constructed. The representation not having met its consideration, have preferred this petition before this Court. 4. Sri Shivaprasad Shantanagoudar, learned counsel for the respondents – BDA submits that if reasonable time is granted, the representation of the petitioners would be considered and necessary orders would be passed in accordance with law.” Therefore, she seeks that an identical direction be issued to the respondents – Bengaluru Development Authority to consider the representation of the petitioner. 4. In the light of the afore-quoted order, we deem it appropriate to pass the following: ORDER a. The writ petition is allowed. b. The respondents – Bengaluru Development Authority to consider the representation submitted by the petitioner on 26.06.2024, within an outer limit of twelve weeks, from the date of receipt of the copy of the order. - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:30205-DB WP No. 16180 of 2026 c. The respondents – Bengaluru Development Authority shall also communicate the order that would be passed on the representation, to the petitioner. d. Till the consideration of the representation happen, the parties are directed to maintain status quo, qua the properties of the petitioner. Ordered accordingly. Sd/- (M.NAGAPRASANNA) JUDGE Sd/- (VENKATESH NAIK T) JUDGE NVJ List No.: 1 Sl No.: 25